Syrian official newspaper takes credit for Iraq bombings

September 4, 2009 No. 2519

Following August 19 Baghdad Bombings, Syrian Daily Teshreen Warns Obama: The Syria-Iran Alliance, Which Is Cultivating the Resistance, Has Won a Great Victory– And Will Not Wait Until Hesitant Obama Reaches a Decision

In an August 22, 2009 article in the Syrian government daily Teshreen, Nasser Qandil, a former Lebanese MP who is close to Syria, wrote that some in Washington were acting to worsen the security situation in Iraq. Their aim, he said, is to extend the U.S. military presence in the country, which will harm U.S. President Barack Obama in his next election campaign; to promote the Biden Plan to partition Iraq into three regions; and to sabotage the relations among Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.

Qandil warned that although Syria and Iran had shown openness to the possibility of dialogue with the U.S., this was in now at risk due to the hesitancy that characterizes the Obama administration.

Following are excerpts from his article:

The Violence in Iraq Is Meant to Prevent U.S. Withdrawal, Harm President Obama

"The escalation of violence and bloodshed in Iraq in recent days came as the Americans were beginning to prepare for their 2011 troop withdrawal, and as the commanders of the U.S. forces tried to draw up understandings with the countries neighboring [Iraq], particularly Syria, to increase coordination at the border...

"Anyone who is following conditions in Iraq knows that the bloody operations against Iraqi civilians are designed to [reinforce] the call for U.S. forces to remain [in Iraq], and perhaps even redeploy in the cities that they have already left. The excuse given is that if the forces withdraw according to the timetable, the security situation could explode...

"These attacks took place just as many articles and studies were being published by the American and Israeli press, and by several institutes researching the Middle East, about the need to extend the U.S. forces' presence for another four years - or at least until after the next U.S. presidential election in 2012 - so that Obama will not be able to use the withdrawal as a card in his election campaign, and will not be able to claim that he kept his promises from his [first] campaign.

"Other studies link the demand to keep [U.S.] forces [in Iraq] to what they call 'the requirements for negotiating with Iran and guaranteeing Israel's security' prior to the U.S. military pullout. Still other studies hint at the possibility of a war on Iran or of an Israeli war on Lebanon - which, according to this approach, requires U.S. willingness to give Israel this opportunity prior to the [U.S.] troop withdrawal [from Iraq]...

"American research institutes are saying that the safest option for Iraq is a return to the three regions theory, presented by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden when he headed the [U.S. Senate] Committee on Foreign Relations. According to this model, encouragement of this track will help provide the safety net required for a troop withdrawal, [by keeping] Iraq stable."

"This Reveals Two Opposing Lines Among the Influential Circles in Washington"

"It was against the backdrop of this American political and media atmosphere that the recent attacks in Iraq took place. This reveals two opposing lines among the influential circles in Washington. While the president's team is acting slowly and hesitatingly on the negotiations track, and opening a window to cooperation with the countries neighboring Iraq - as he started to do with Syria and is about to start with Iran - there are those who are acting to worsen the Iraq security situation, so as to reopen the door to an extension of the [U.S.] troop presence in Iraq, and also to encourage the option of partitioning the country."

The August 19 Attacks Were Aimed at Sabotaging Assad's Syrian-Turkish-Iraqi-Iranian Cooperation Plan

"...It seems that the [August 19] attacks were aimed at [sabotaging] Syria-U.S. contacts by fomenting suspicion between the allies Syria and Iran; at stopping the progress that had been made in Syria-Iraq relations on the security and economic level when the Iraqi prime minister visited Damascus; and at complicating the Syrian-Turkish-Iraqi-Iranian cooperation plan, proposed by Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad as a future strategic plan, to which he is devoting much attention, time, and effort...

"Those engaged in escalating regional conflicts - those who lose by, and are harmed by, the American openness to the new reality - are racking up achievements against the Obama administration - because it is hesitant, slow, and irresolute in translating this openness into making the required bold decisions, and because it continues to give the Israeli leadership the right of veto in security and political resolutions regarding the region.

"Further hesitation by the Obama administration would mean another blow to the hopes for change that were pinned on it following the U.S. presidential election... Indeed, there could be Israeli war adventurism, or increased bloodletting in Iraq. But the biggest loser of an escalation in the destruction and blood[shed] would first and foremost be President Obama - they [i.e. those who act against him] want him to end his first term exhausted, without the confidence of the voters or of any of those with whom he promised to turn over a new leaf."

"The Syrian-Iranian Alliance... Will Not Wait Until Those Who Hesitate Reach a Decision"

"The region can tolerate no more experiments with the blood of its sons. Thus, the Syrian-Iranian message was clear and resolute, when President Assad visited Iran - that many, from near and far, must read well the meaning of what is happening in the region. The meaning is that the Syrian-Iranian alliance, which is cultivating the resistance movements, has won an historic, significant victory. Despite its openness to the dialogue option, this alliance will not wait until those who hesitate reach a decision."

Has Hezbollah turned Lebanon into a Jihadist State?

Has Hezbollah turned Lebanon into a Jihadist State?
By Elias Bejjani *

September 5/09

All the unfolding destructive, shameful, terrorist and corrupting events that are currently hitting Lebanon and its peace-loving people illustrate with no shred of a doubt that the terrorist organization, Hezbollah, is merely grabbing hold of the Lebanese state and its institutions as hostages.

In reality, Hezbollah has completely assumed Syria's notorious oppressive and murderous occupational role in the aftermath of the Syrian army's withdrawal from Lebanon in 2005. This armed Iranian fundamentalist organization is currently the actual and primary obstacle to the country's cabinet formation, either through its huge arsenal and its powerful mini state, or through its threats to replicate its barbaric 7th of May 2008 invasion of Beirut and Mount Lebanon.

The following three recent documented reports clearly delineate and portray the extent of Hezbollah's deadly and cancerous influence not only on the state's decision-making process, but also on the social norms and fabrics that have been imposed on the Lebanese people in each and every aspect and issue of daily life.

Assafir Lebanese Daily published on 21/08/09 the report below under the title:" The Red Cross receives the body of a Lebanese from the occupied Palestine (Israel)": "The International Committee of the Red Cross received today from the Israeli occupational authorities at the gate of Naqoura the body of the Lebanese Nabil Hanna Asmar (45 years), who died in hospital in the occupied Palestinian territories (Israel) due to an incurable disease. The body was handed over to Asmar's family in the southern city of Jazine. Asmar had fled from the south to the Palestinian territories during the Israeli withdrawal (from South Lebanon) in 2000.

Al Mustaqbal Lebanese Daily, published this report on Friday, 28 August 2009, under the title: "Hezbollah buries a martyr in the Town of Yohmour-Ckeaf': "The Islamic Resistance, Hezbollah and the Town of Yohmour-Ckeaf" residents laid to rest today Martyr Ali Hussein Aliek (28 years) who died while performing his duties. In the procession front line was Sheikh Abdel Karim Obeid, Hezbollah's in-charge-for-central social-activities and a military delegation from the leadership of the Third Brigade of the Lebanese army. The body was buried in the town's cemetery after prayers that were headed by Sheikh Obeid. Wreaths from the Secretary General of Hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the leadership of the Islamic Resistance, the Lebanese army, and Yohmour town were placed on the tomb.

The March 14 website had this story on August 29, 2009: In an interview that the site conducted with Mrs.Yvette Hanna, on the first anniversary of the assassination of her son, the Lebanese Army officer pilot, Samer Hanna, in the hands of the Hezbollah militia while on board a military helicopter in south Lebanon, she stated: "The blood of all the martyrs of Lebanon have gone in vain, all of Lebanon is wasted in vain, toHell with the country, its politician, its policy and everything that is in it. We are in a country that is going with the wind. Nothing more could be said because I am upset from all that is happening"

What a tragic paradox of malice, deceit, licentiousness and cowardice. Nabil Hanna Asmar, a patriotic Lebanese citizen, and a real nationalist who fought for years defending his southern Jazine city returned back from Israel to his beloved homeland as a corpse and in a coffin. The Lebanese state was completely absent during the funeral and not even one official sent a wreath of flowers. Why? Because Hezbollah with its evil and cancerous influence and power has been manipulating the Lebanese state's decision making process and obstructing the honorable return of our Southern Lebanese people who were forced to take refuge in neighboring Israel in 2005, in the aftermath of the Israeli army's withdrawal from South Lebanon.

Thousands of southern citizens who fled to Israel at that time are all tagged as collaborators, agents and traitors due to the fact that they did not want to fight their own citizens and because of the serious and actual threats to butcher them that Hezbollah's leaders voiced publicly.

Meanwhile, another Lebanese citizen, Ali Hussein Aliek (28 years), that Hezbollah recruited, like many of the other tens of thousands of Shiite Lebanese, trained, armed and was dispatched to fight in one of its jihadist battles. The Lebanese state which did not have any role in this whole process, did not know where this jihadist was killed, by whom and on which frontier he was fighting, bowing to Hezbollah's terrorism and abiding by its criteria of treason, patriotism, nationalism and martyrdom. A delegation from the Lebanese Army participated in this jihadist's funeral and decorated him jointly with Hezbollah with the title of a martyr.

Hezbollah is not only taking the Lebanese state a hostage and dictating its Iranian denominational religious jihadist doctrines on the Lebanese people, but it is also is murdering with cold blood the country's army officers and soldiers. In this context its jihadist fighters downed on 28/08/08 a Lebanese army helicopter in South Lebanon (between Sojod and Armati) and forced it to make an emergency landing. When on the ground its pilot, 1st Lt. Samer Hanna, was shot and killed, while the co-pilot officer was savagely assaulted. Hezbollah handed over to the Lebanese Military judiciary one of its gunmen alleging that he was the assailant and that the incident was a mere regrettable mistake. Surprisingly, the killer was released after only 10 months.

One wonders how the state of Lebanon could be that biased against its own citizens to the extent that it glorifies the killers and condemns their victims?

How could it abandon all its governing responsibilities, infringe on the constitution and all the country's laws, succumb to Hezbollah's terrorism and officially decorate a Hezbollah gunmen with the title of martyr while keeping a blind eye on the horrible atrocities it inflicts on our own people in Israel legally, ethically and morally?

Has Lebanon become a jihadist state run and controlled by Hezbollah, and abiding by its Iranian religious jihadist war doctrines?

Aren't the Lebanese people entitled to know on which Arabic, regional or international frontiers Hezbollah is fighting? Aren't the Lebanese people entitled to know where Ali Hassan Aliek was killed and according to which criteria or law he was decorated as a martyr?

On the other hand, because of Hezbollah's dictates this same state has been constantly obstructing the honorable return of its own people from Israel, although every patriot and conscientious Lebanese knows very well that these abandoned citizens are the real and actual heroes.

There will definitely be no credibility or any kind of respect for all those Lebanese officials, politicians and clergy who obstruct the return of our refugees from Israel either because of hatred and revenge complexes, or because of cowardice and dhimmitude. All are committing a crime against their own people.

It is time for Lebanon to open wide its doors and welcome back with dignity, gratitude and apologies our people who have been living as refugees in Israel since May 2005.

I conclude with what Prophet Isaiah said about such evil people: " Woe to you who destroy, but you weren't destroyed; and who betray, but nobody betrayed you!
When you have finished destroying, you will be destroyed; and when you have made an end of betrayal, you will be betrayed" (Isaiah 33/1)

 

In Egypt: Building churches is a sin against God

No comment is needed here, is it?

Egypt Muslim Council: Building of Churches is 'Sin' Against God

 

Egyptian Muslim leaders are caught in a storm of controversy after a human rights group confronted them about a fatwa (Islamic edict) that stated the building of a church is "a sin against God."

 

Tue, Sep. 01, 2009 Posted: 05:15 PM EDT

 

Egyptian Muslim leaders are caught in a storm of controversy after a human rights group confronted them about a fatwa (Islamic edict) that stated the building of a church is "a sin against God."

 

Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, the highest official of religious law in Egypt, and the justice minister have issued an investigation of the jurists who issued the fatwa, according to Assyrian International News Agency.

 

The controversy began when the president of the Egyptian Union Human Rights Organization, Dr. Naguib Gabraeel, asked the Fatwa Council about a statement found in a textbook at Cairo University on inheritance and execution of wills.

 

Students, both Muslims and Christians, were taught "it is forbidden for a person to donate money for what would lead to sin, such as donating in his will money towards build[ing] a church, a nightclub, a gambling casino, towards promoting the alcohol industry or for building a barn for rearing pigs, cats or dogs."

 

Gabraeel asked the council what the sharia (Islamic law) position on the statement found in the textbook is. He asked if it is forbidden for a Muslim to donate money to build a church or a monk's quarters even if it is in the name of God and Christianity, which is recognized by the country's constitution. The Egyptian constitution claims to respect religious freedom. He also noted that wealthy Coptic Christian businessmen have donated towards the building of mosques.

 

The council replied by affirming the law found in the textbook and issuing a fatwa on it.

 

Included in the fatwa is an explanation on why it is a "sin" to build a church. According to the fatwa, Christians believe salvation is achieved through belief in Jesus as Lord while Muslims don't. Muslims believe that Issa [Jesus in Arabic] "is a slave of Allah and His Messenger, and that Allah is one."

 

The Islamic edict said God did not have a son and that Christianity deviated from absolute monotheism. Therefore, a Muslim is forbidden to donate funds towards a building that does not worship Allah alone.

 

The author of the textbook, Mohammed el-Maghrabbi, said it is sinful for even a Christian to devote money in his will towards building a church because it would be considered in Islam as separation from God.

 

In other words, it is illegal for even non-Muslims to offer money in their will towards building a church or synagogue.

 

The fatwa has upset many people, especially Coptic Christians, for categorizing churches with nightclubs, casinos, alcohol, and places to raise animals considered unclean by Islam.

 

After receiving the shocking response by the council, Gabraeel and a delegation from his human rights group visited the Grand Sheikh Mohamed Sayed Tantawi of the famous Al-Azhar University, a chief Sunni Islamic learning center in the world.

 

Tantawi contradicted the council and said "sharia does not prevent Muslims from donating to the building of a church, as it is his free money." He also went on to say sharia law does not interfere with other faiths "because religion, faith and what a person believes in is a relationship between him and his God."

 

Immediately after Tantawi's statements were publicized, there was a backlash from the Muslim community and he revoked his statements less than 24 hours after the visit by the human rights delegation. Tantawi claimed the delegation had misunderstood him, even though everything he said was recorded and sent to media outlets and uploaded on Coptic advocacy web sites.

 

Egyptian Christians see the controversy as explicitly revealing how religious authorities and the government truly feel about the building of churches. In Egypt, Christians are not allowed to construct or fix churches unless they receive a permit from governors. But usually authorities make excuses and circumvent giving a direct answer to requests for building permits. At the end, however, nearly all requests for permits in Egypt are denied.

 

In contrast, there are no such building permits necessary for the construction or fixing of mosques.

 

Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter

Anal "terrorist"

From the Saudi Gazette:

 

"According to Okaz sources, the bomber who detonated himself only a meter away from the Prince was part of a terrorist cell formed to target oil installations and public figures.
The sources said the bomber stayed in an apartment on Sari Street, northwest of Jeddah, Thursday."

 

... "Okaz sources said the bomb was implanted in the attacker's rectum, which could explain why he refused to drink coffee at the Prince's Court"

Noteworthy are the location of the bomb, as well as the use of the word "terrorist." A few sentences later however, the article reverts to the politically correct "militant." Terrorists never attack in Israel. Only "militants" and "gunmen" attack in  Israel.

 

Jokers are having a field day with the location of the bomb.

 

Ami Isseroff

 

 

Qaeda attack on Prince part of wider plot

By Abdullah Al-Orefij

RIYADH – The failed assassination attempt on Prince Muhammad Bin Naif, Assistant Minister of Interior for Security Affairs, Thursday night was planned by Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula which operates from Yemen, sources confirmed.

The suicide bomber was recruited by Yemeni Nasser Al-Wohaishi, known also by the nom de guerre Abu Baseer, the sources said.

 

Al-Wohaishi is the head of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which had announced in an Internet posting last January the merger of the Saudi and Yemeni branches of Al-Qaeda.
The merger was seen by analysts as an attempt to consolidate after the Saudi branch of Al-Qaeda was practically wiped out following a vigorous counter-terrorism campaign led by Prince Muhammad.

 

According to Okaz sources, the bomber who detonated himself only a meter away from the Prince was part of a terrorist cell formed to target oil installations and public figures.
The sources said the bomber stayed in an apartment on Sari Street, northwest of Jeddah, Thursday.

He had slipped into the Kingdom from Mareb, east of Sana'a, Yemen's Foreign Minister Abu-Bakr Al-Qirbi told The Associated Press.

 

"He was in Yemen," said Al-Qirbi. "He claimed that he was going to hand himself over to Saudi authorities and make a statement to his followers to abandon Al-Qaeda principles."
Okaz sources said the bomb was implanted in the attacker's rectum, which could explain why he refused to drink coffee at the Prince's Court.

The bomber had sent word he wanted to surrender personally to the Prince who had ordered that he not be searched to encourage others to come forward.
At the Prince's home in Jeddah's north Obhur beach area Thursday night around 11.30 P.M., the attacker was in line to enter a gathering of well-wishers for Ramadan when he blew himself up. The Prince was lightly injured in the attack. The bomber died.

Saudi authorities have so far not announced the identity of the attacker who along with his brother was on the Interior Ministry's list of 85 most wanted militants.
Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, has made several unsuccessful attempts to strike inside the Kingdom.

 

In April, Saudi authorities discovered a cave in the remote Saudi mountains near the Yemeni border that was a way station for the militants. Saudi police seized 11 suspected Saudi militants planning armed robberies, kidnappings and other attacks. Earlier this month Saudi authorities announced the arrest of 44 militants and the seizure of explosives, detonators and guns.

Thursday's bombing was the first assassination attempt against a member of the royal family in decades and was also the first significant attack by militants in the Kingdom since 2006.

Saudi Arabia has waged a fierce crackdown on Al-Qaeda militants in the country. It has killed or captured most of their leaders after a string of attacks that started in 2003.
However, Thursday attack raises concerns that Yemen's instability could allow Al-Qaeda to carry out cross-border attacks. The Yemeni army is on a near three-week-long offensive on strongholds of Zaidi rebels, also known as Huthis, in lawless swathes around Saada city in the Mareb region. The security forces are stretched by the tribal revolt in the north and separatist unrest in the south. – Okaz/ SG/ Agencies